Wednesday, August 25, 2010

Contrasting Moderates

Foreign Policy mag is quoting PJ Crowley lecture cautioning wingnut bloggers against Shirley Sherroding Imam Rauf:
The Cable asked Crowley directly, "Is he the Muslim Shirley Sherrod?"

Crowley responded, "That's a good cautionary tale for everybody."
Funny, since we still don't know whom at the White House told Vilsack's assistant to fire Sherrod (as she insisted numerous times after the event). The press isn't allowed to speak with that person. So cautionary "tale" might be apropos since the imam is out of pocket as well.

FP then goes on to pull their own snippets out of the transcript to make their point about Rauf's moderateness--touche, but one must look at the big picture.

For instance, it's hard to take out of context Rauf's claim that Saddam's starvation of his own Shiite children was a grievance leading to 9/11 when he essentially told Ed Bradley the same thing on 60 Minutes in 2001. When he said we created bin Laden, presumably by our helping the mujihadeen defeat the Soviets in the 80s, that's crazy (unless he's a truther--he did mention Fahrenheit 9/11). Besides, bin Laden's turnabout evidently came when our forces arrived in Saudi to get rid of the scotch-drinking apostate to their north. Some blowback.

FP also failed to explain a couple of other points he made that seem important, liek Rauf's reference to supporting a one-state solution in Israel. That basically means a Palestinian state with Jews living there under their rule, ie, the South Africa solution.

Contrast that to another moderate voice within Islam with a dissenting opinion on all of this:
The mainstream media has deliberately ignored the fact that there is legitimate basis for fear of mosques — as it is a demonstrable fact that mosques and Muslims have been disproportionately connected to terrorism in this country and around the world, a fact that the media won’t report. Moreover, in the examples of opposition to specific mosques chosen by the media as evidence of popular “bigotry,” the media has selectively ignored the openly available evidence showing unambiguously that these mosques or their officials are connected to or supportive of the radical Muslim Brotherhood (the parent of al-Qaeda), Hamas, and other radical Islamic fundamentalist organizations.
As he points out, recent history supports a skeptical American attitude towards mosques in general, and especially one near GZ, built there purposefully, with a groundbreaking planned for 9/11/11. The truth in all of this probably comes down more to Israel and its future than anything else--perhaps that's why Rauf won't condemn HAMAS. So, around and around we go.

3 comments:

LASunsett said...

As a Christian, I would vehemently condemn any radical sect that brought down two towers full of innocent people, anywhere on the globe or in any other way killed innocent people to make a political statement.

As a Christian, I would condemn any wholesale persecution of any other religion.

If a radical Christian sect had murdered thousands of people anywhere in the world in the name of that same sect's perverted view, I would condemn the building of a church or cathedral within two blocks of the site of said atrocity.

As a Christian, I would not say one thing to Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, and/or Jews, and another thing to Christians.

In other words, the very essence of my faith is what causes me to willingly show the same compassion to all, regardless of their faith, and not condemn them or wish calamity upon them in the name of God.

We cannot say the same thing about Rauf or other self-proclaimed Muslim clerics like him. In Christianity, I'd like to think that a Buddhist, Hindu, Muslim, or Jew could walk into a Christian church and feel both welcome and safe, to do so. Not so with a mosque.

A.C. McCloud said...

I just don't know why someone interested in bridge building would continue to shove something in the recepient of the bridge-building's face after resistance, especially to do with something as sensitive as GZ. So I completely agree with you, LA. Would not want Christianity doing the same, even if Christians in general weren't responsible.

I'm thinking he thinks it's AMERICANS that need to be schooled on Islam, not the other way around. If that's the case, building his center down the block from GZ is a huge slap in our collective face.

But I'm still have a lot of trouble with him saying the Iraqi sanctions were justified in flaring outrage, when it was Saddam who caused all that--the same guy we just removed. That bin Laden was outraged at American troops being on Saudi soil to remove the dictator should be instructive--UBL later used the very same sanctions and dead Iraqi children against us, even though we helped him defeat the Soviets and were helping him get rid of the apostate.

Debbie said...

Rush Limbaugh quoted (I forget) saying "There is no moderate Islam, but there are moderate Muslims." I have a problem relating the two.

As to Rauf, he wrote in his book his desire to claim Ground Zero for the Muslims. Obama's Cairo speech was taken from Rauf's book chapter 6.

"the Arabic version of Feisal Abdul Rauf’s book was published in Malaysia titled “A CALL TO PRAYER, FROM THE WORLD TRADE CENTER RUBBLE: ISLAMIC DAWA (SUMMONS TO ISLAM) IN THE HEART OF AMERICA POST-9/11.""

Debbie
Right Truth
http://www.righttruth.typepad.com